SUVARNA SHRIKANT DESHMUKH,BULDHANA vs. ITO WARD-2, KHAMGOAN
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the First Appellate Authority, which had dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay in filing. The assessee claimed the delay was due to a change in counsel and lack of awareness of tax provisions. The Assessing Officer had made an ex-parte addition of Rs.19,34,240.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not file a proper affidavit to support the condonation of delay. However, considering the peculiar facts, the Tribunal decided to afford one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate their case for condonation of delay by producing relevant documents. The case was remanded to the Commissioner.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer is sustainable.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging
the impugned order dated 17/04/2025, passed by the First Appellate
Authority, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment
year 2018–19.
As the outset, this Court observe that there was a delay of 429
days in filing first appeal before the learned Commissioner, challenging
the assessment order dated 03/01/2024, passed under section 147 r/w
section 144 r/w section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short
"the Act").
Suvarna Shrikant Deshmukh ITA no.369/Nag./2025
The assessee, before the learned Commissioner, claimed as
under:–
"The appellant is from a small town and does not known the provisions of the Income Tax Act 1961 and therefore appointed a counsel to file such things. The appellant was unaware of the notices and orders issued earlier because the earlier counsel was handling all the matters of the appellant but the earlier counsel did not respond to the notices and orders. Therefore the appellant decided to change the counsel and the new counsel was duly appointed and all the matters are communicated to the new counsel. So your honor kindly consider the condonation of delay in filing the appeal due to the above mentioned reason. Please do the needful."
Though, the learned Commissioner considered the aforesaid
reasons stated by the assessee for condonation of delay, but by
considering the peculiar facts and circumstances and mainly on the
reason that the assessee has not even bothered to file a duly sworn
affidavit or anything from the side of the C.A., to confirm the above
fact, ultimately dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine, by not
admitting the same for adjudication and by declining to condone the
delay.
The learned Amicus Curiae, has claimed that before the Assessing
Officer, the assessee has submitted all the relevant details and, therefore, the addition of Rs.19,34,240, on account of variation in cash
deposit is unsustainable.
This Court has given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts
and circumstances of the case. Though, the assessee had filed some of
Suvarna Shrikant Deshmukh ITA no.369/Nag./2025
the details, however, it is a fact, as it clearly appears from the
assessment order that the assessee in response to various statutory
notices, eventually made no compliance, which resulted into almost the
assessment order as ex–parte and making the aforesaid addition.
Whatever it may be, as the learned Commissioner has not condoned
the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine, as
observed above, mainly on the reasons that the assessee has not
bothered to file Affidavit and nothing from the side of the C.A. to
confirm the above facts, this Court deem it appropriate to afford one
more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case qua
condonation of delay by producing the relevant affidavit and
document(s) as desired by the learned Commissioner. Suffice to say,
the learned Commissioner shall provide reasonable opportunity of
being heard to the assessee. Thus the case is remanded to the file of
Ld. Commissioner accordingly.
The assessee is also directed to file relevant
submissions/documents. It is clarified that, in case of subsequent
default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.
This Court appreciate and endorse the sincere efforts and able
assistance provided by the learned Amicus Curiae in coming to the right
conclusion and for passing the order in its right perspective and proper
manner and for substantial justice.
Suvarna Shrikant Deshmukh ITA no.369/Nag./2025
9 In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/06/2025
Sd/-Sd/- N.K. CHOUDHRY JUDICIAL MEMBER
Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur
